1957 Brooks Robinson Prices

[Stetson_1883]

I just recently purchased a nice 57 Topps Robinson rookie (SGC 7) for around $500.

Ive always been puzzled why this card, in my eyes, is so expensive. I mean you can get a nice 48 Kiner rookie for half that (and it's almost 10 years older).....a 48 Leaf Musial rookie for the same price or a Killebrew rookie for half that, among many other cheaper rookies featuring "better players" on older cardboard.

Even the other HOF rookies in the 57 Topps set (Drysdale, Frank Robinson, Bill Maz, Herzog) dont come close to Brook's astronomical price.

What gives?

[familytoad]

This is likely due to the combination of popularity and the 4th series numbering of Mr. Robinson's rookie card.

The 4th series is notoriously tougher than any other in 1957 (typically it is the last series in other issues but not here)

Brooks has legendary status among his fans, definitely a bigger collectible fan base than the other rookies in 1957. Among Baltimore Orioles fans, he's probably their biggest star.

I am not sure about Musial in comparison, but the 1948 card is not his first actual playing year so that may play into consideration on pricing. His high grade versions are still expensive...and his star power is quite high.

Kiner cards are not a good comparison. Despite his HR hitting prowess, he is generally not considered an all-time great among his contemporaries, but Brooks certainly is in that argument.

[glynparson]

Its the old economic principle of supply and demand. PS if you have Leaf Musial in a 7 (84) for $500 will take as many as you can get me. Will also buy 1955 topps Killebrews in 7 (84) for $250 again as many as you can get me.

[Peter_Spaeth]

No idea what you are talking about on the Musial.

Latest Auction Prices for: SGC 84 - Average Price: $2,607.00


8/7/14 Huggins & Scott Image 18 $2,607.00
5/15/14 Goodwin Image 6 $1,655.29
1/24/14 eBay Image amazingspider-fan e***r 27 $1,743.96
10/30/13 Sports Card Link Image 14 $1,898.00
1/31/13 eBay Image tonyetrade 0***0 BIN $1,750.00
3/14/12 eBay Image probstein123 l***v 26 $1,426.00
3/2/12 Sterling Sports Image 1 $1,150.00
12/2/11 Greg Bussineau Image 8 $1,110.00
2/1/09 eBay Image djhasl 7***7 4 $1,249.00
11/27/08 eBay Image red-zone e***2 BIN $1,195.00
12/16/07 Memory Lane $1,387.68

[basesareempty]

People in Baltimore name their children after him. Enough said!!!

[bobbyw8469]

Indeed...I am in the market for the Leaf Musial for $500 that you speak of. High grade, the same as your Robinson comparison.

[Stetson_1883]

What I meant was that you can get a nice looking Musial or Killebrew rookie for $500. Sorry for not being more specific.

[glchen]

I think it's player popularity rather than pure statistics with a lot of folks have player sets for Brooks Robinson. See Derek Jeter, Nolan Ryan, Mickey Mantle (vs Mays or Williams) for other examples.

[Stetson_1883]

Originally Posted by familytoad

This is likely due to the combination of popularity and the 4th series numbering of Mr. Robinson's rookie card.

The 4th series is notoriously tougher than any other in 1957 (typically it is the last series in other issues but not here)

Brooks has legendary status among his fans, definitely a bigger collectible fan base than the other rookies in 1957. Among Baltimore Orioles fans, he's probably their biggest star.

I am not sure about Musial in comparison, but the 1948 card is not his first actual playing year so that may play into consideration on pricing. His high grade versions are still expensive...and his star power is quite high.

Kiner cards are not a good comparison. Despite his HR hitting prowess, he is generally not considered an all-time great among his contemporaries, but Brooks certainly is in that argument.

Thanks Brian for the insightful reply.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Stetson_1883

What I meant was that you can get a nice looking Musial or Killebrew rookie for $500. Sorry for not being more specific.

Unless you are doing apples to apples (same grade) it is not in this day where the grade is everything a meaningful comparison of relative card values.

[Econteachert205]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Unless you are doing apples to apples (same grade) it is not in this day where the grade is everything a meaningful comparison of relative card values.

For newer or returning hobbyists this has been an important realization, myself included. You could show me four cards I could deem nice and they could theoretically grade 7,4,2 and auth, based on unseen hairlines, stealth doctoring or other missed grading elements. Having grown up collecting in the early 90's where anything eye catching was nice I've really had to learn to carefully judge raw cards and graded ones for that matter. I still suck at it.


As for Robinson his youthful appearance is kind of iconic and as already said it is a tough series. When people think great 3rd base defense even today, he is the benchmark... Not many guys from that era have that sort of relevance.

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by Stetson_1883

I just recently purchased a nice 57 Topps Robinson rookie (SGC 7) for around $500.

Ive always been puzzled why this card, in my eyes, is so expensive. I mean you can get a nice 48 Kiner rookie for half that (and it's almost 10 years older).....a 48 Leaf Musial rookie for the same price or a Killebrew rookie for half that, among many other cheaper rookies featuring "better players" on older cardboard.

Even the other HOF rookies in the 57 Topps set (Drysdale, Frank Robinson, Bill Maz, Herzog) dont come close to Brook's astronomical price.

What gives?

First, I think you got a deal if it's centered and it's in focus.

Secondly, as an O's fan, and having watched Brooks play the game, I disagree with your premise that there are cheaper rookies featuring "better players". I do think Frank, for some reason, is underrated in the card market.

I think it's iconic and just a great looking card; you really shouldn't be puzzled why a rookie card of the greatest third baseman is somewhat expensive.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Best fielder perhaps but overall there are at least several better third basemen than Brooks.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Best fielder perhaps but overall there are at least several better third basemen than Brooks.

+1

I'm admittedly not from Baltimore so I have never understood the "Brooks is the greatest 3rd Baseman of All Time" argument as it doesn't hold water when you check out the statistics (Schmidt, Brett, Matthews, Boggs, etc. all are superior in most statisticians estimations).

He was also among the best "fielding" 3rd basemen of all time, but fans are very selective about fielding statistics because other great "fielding" players are largely discounted and deemed not worthy of enshrinement by the same people touting Brooks' exploits (see Bill Mazeroski, Omar Vizquel (not yet in), Luis Aparicio, etc.). There is a bit of a cult following for him as he is one of Baseball's truly "Good Guys" and I honestly think that has far more to do with it than anything else. You get someone like Frank Robinson which was a FAR superior (and truly underrated) baseball player BUT he isn't a warm human being and was never a fan favorite like Brooks and his cards while perhaps being priced similarly just don't sell as well.